Talk:Cigna/Archives/2012
 | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Info box
There appears to be information in the box at the start that only appears in 'edit' mode. Does anyone else have this problem or is it a result of my Apple-Mac/Firefox combination? Doozy88 14:09, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
(1818)50-0-6262, cigna, Glendale, California; Nataline Sarkisyan; Sarkisyan
Cigna denied transplant; girl dead.
[[ hopiakuta Please do sign your signature on your message. ~~ Thank You. -]] 18:30, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
There is nothing "controversial" about recent events. CIGNA made decisions and the girl died while waiting. This is Ethical behaviour not something that is controversial.
By labeling the section "Controversy", it becomes sided to CIGNA and is not NPOV. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.140.14.84 (talk) 15:35, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
- The article's weight is definitely not NPOV to begin with. The insurer and its predecessors have been around for a bit over 200 years, yet fully half the article discusses one particular incident in 2007, a pretty extreme example of recentism. --Delirium (talk) 22:32, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
The controversy section has been inproperly researched. The situation is given only as point of opinion, and is obviously not a medically accurate view. No research besides HEADLINE information was used. The information is also used in an BIAS format, and does not inform of the nature and type of surgery preformed. I refer you all to the actual documentation that states coverage information as well as a FULL description of the procedure. Please note, that this was NOT a typical procedure. I am upset that once again it is the company and not the doctor. If anyone is smart enough, actually preform the research.
Merge
Cigna International Expatriate Benefits should be merged into this article. I don't know why it was ever separate.
It looks like this article has suffered some edit warring in the past. It could use some historical stuff, like the history of INA and Connecticut General and their merger. Randall Bart Talk 19:16, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
"Death panel"
There seems to be a recent "desire" by IPs to describe the article's subject as "...a global health services death panel". This has been going on for several days, and I'm tempted to request protection (or protect the article myself if there's a consensus here to do so). Thoughts? TFOWR 09:55, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
- If it's multiple IPs then it makes sense. Give it a couple weeks or so, see if they go elsewhere. Etrigan (talk) 10:47, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
- Multiple IPs from a mix of ISPs: MegaPath, Comcast and AT&T at least. Of the three IPs I've looked at, one is blocked (one that seems to have similar, confused ideas about Humana) so blocking the two remaining IPs may be an option. I'll ponder over the next few hours...! Thanks for your feedback. TFOWR 11:37, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
- Best to just protect the page. There's no other way to keep the truth from getting out.69.1.153.39 (talk) 15:55, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
- ...or block them? Both work for me... Since we're now up to four IPs I guess protection may be the only way to stop the WP:SOAPBOXing. TFOWR 16:02, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
- Best to just protect the page. There's no other way to keep the truth from getting out.69.1.153.39 (talk) 15:55, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
- Multiple IPs from a mix of ISPs: MegaPath, Comcast and AT&T at least. Of the three IPs I've looked at, one is blocked (one that seems to have similar, confused ideas about Humana) so blocking the two remaining IPs may be an option. I'll ponder over the next few hours...! Thanks for your feedback. TFOWR 11:37, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
Edit Request from anon, 6 September 2010
CIGNA announced that it had acquired Belgian-based VanBreda international, a major global insurer for staff of international organizations, on 31 August 2010. Cite: http://newsroom.cigna.com/article_display.cfm?article_id=1238 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.138.105.1 (talk) 15:49, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
Edit request from R2thos, 7 October 2010
Create a new section that falls between the Quality of Care and Ethics sections.
Extended content
|
|---|
Vote for merge with Cigna International Expatriate BenefitsI understand how the CIEB unit could be considered worthy of its own article (has a different headquarters, is a large, multinational business unit with a different objective than the parent company) however I think CIGNA's article is lacking and could benefit from the additional information provided by the CIEB article. Also consider that more than half of the information in the Cigna International Expatriate Benefits article directly relates to Cigna. Grmike (talk) 08:06, 13 July 2011 (UTC)grmike |